It never ceases to amaze me how the Red-Green coalition twists, omits, or invents history to serve the grievance script of the hour. Gaza was not simply “sealed” by Israeli cruelty after disengagement. The record shows an attempted framework for opening Gaza to trade, travel, and development, brokered with American involvement and tied to basic security conditions. That part gets memory-holed because it wrecks the propaganda. Hamas did not build a Singapore on the Mediterranean. It built terror rule, civil war, rockets, tunnels, kidnappings, and finally October 7. Israel did not owe Gaza a seaport for importing war. Egypt had security concerns too. Facts matter. Timelines matter. Agreements matter. If the maniacs want to talk about Gaza’s isolation, they must also talk about the political and terrorist choices that murdered the alternative.
fifteenth floor vs twelfth floor means that the Hamas Gang won the election by a whopping 20%
"Hamas militants seized several Fatah members and threw one of them, Mohammed Sweirki, an officer in the Presidential Guard, off the top of the tallest building in Gaza, a 15-story apartment building. In retaliation, Fatah militants attacked and killed the Imam of the city's Great Mosque, Mohammed al-Rifati. They also opened fire on the home of Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh. Just before midnight, a Hamas militant was thrown off a 12-story building."
Much easier to just blame and hate the Jews. Remember what the Arabs always say when among themselves Khybar khybar ya yahud the army of Mohamed will come for you. Yeah really.
The Fatah party came to power in 2005, the same year Israel completely withdrew from Gaza and handed control to the Fatah party. Subsequently, Hamas fought Fatah in a violent coup and took control of Gaza in 2007.
בג"ץ סירב להכשיל את ההתנתקות: הרכב של 11 שופטי בג"ץ הודיע הבוקר (ה') כי הוא דוחה את 12 העתירות השונות שהוגשו נגד חוק פינוי-פיצוי. ההחלטה התקבלה ברוב של 10 שופטים, נגד דעתו החולקת של השופט אדמונד לוי. 9.6.05
Israel already knows what happens when it withdraws from territories.
It may have worked out mostly well with the Sinai Peninsula, but the two other times out of three, Islamist terrorists took over.
First, when the IDF left southern Lebanon in 2000, and then after the Disengagement from the Gaza Strip in 2005.
In both of those cases, a local population had been trained to keep the extremists at bay – first, the South Lebanon Army, which worked with the IDF, then, Fatah-affiliated Palestinian Authority security forces, trained by the US – and they were quickly overrun and massacred by Hezbollah and Hamas, respectively.
"We have seen from recent history that opening the door to territorial compromise to the Palestinians has not resulted in peace, but rather in war. In 2005, Israel made the painful but bold decision to evacuate all its citizens from Gaza. Optimists envisioned the possibility of a “Singapore on the Mediterranean,” with a flourishing economy and peaceful relations rooted in commerce. Israel even agreed to leave intact its world-class greenhouses and farms that blossomed throughout the Strip.
Tragically, Palestinians destroyed those agriculture facilities within 24 hours of Israel’s “Disengagement” from Gaza, where Hamas terrorists quickly took over the governing functions. Israel has been forced to fight three wars over the past 16 years to stop the missile attacks and cross-border infiltrations targeting our schools, hospitals and communities."
Israel withdrew entirely from Gaza, pulling out 8,500 settlers, and handing over to the "Palestinians" the greenhouses in which those settlers had grown flowers and fruit for export to Europe, in the hope that the new owners would take over the turnkey operation and thrive.
Instead, the Palestinians chose to vandalize and destroy the greenhouses.
Mahmoud Abbas was elected President of the Palestinian Authority. He is now entering the seventeenth year of his four-year term.
Israel is now paying the price for its 2005 Gaza Cowardly Retreat
"What is happening at this current moment in time along our southern border, and what has occurred there in previous rounds of violence, is not something that has taken place within a vacuum. The mortar bombs, the rockets and the missiles neither were, nor are, a matter of divine will. They are all the result of our own stupidity – the folly of the "Disengagement Plan".
I view the so-called Palestinians of Gaza as temporary and belligerent occupants of an Israeli territory, badly in need of eviction for the sake of peace. It's the only way since they have proved (many times over) that they have no intention of ending terrorism or keeping peace agreements.
Gaza is properly part of Israel. The names of the villages are Jewish and go back thousands of years. The people typically called Arabs moved into the region in waves over centuries, and the region was Islamized. The movement of Jewish settlers out of Gaza was a mistake.
The idea that Palestinians should be allowed to stay there and rebuild, after decades of supporting terrorism and with no intention of stopping their war, is ridiculous. They should be expelled from Gaza and from the so-called West Bank (Judea and Samaria), too. Arab states should take them. Some African nations said they would consider it.
The UN's opinion is irrelevant, since it is just being influenced by corrupt member states for partisan reasons. UNRWA's connection to Hamas and its frequent criticism of Israel while ignoring real human rights violations by its member states should have been the scandal that ended the United Nations.
Also, while I'm at it, the Third Temple should be built. The fact that it has not been is simply to quell Islamic fundamentalism. The whole thing has gone on for far too long, only because Muslim religious identity is unfortunately tied to the ideology of anti-Zionism, reflecting a deep insecurity on the part of Muslims who adopt that ideology.
Why do you have to destroy practitioners of the parent faith in order to affirm the truth of your faith? This extreme supersessionism stems from an irrational fear of Jews having political power. Anti-Zionism seems to be the veneer for a deeper collective pathology that has gripped the Muslim world and many parts of the West.
The genocidal ambition to annihilate Israel has been made sacred by Muslim religious leaders. By claiming the Palestinians are helpless victims, it gives license to destroy the supposed oppressor. There is such a demand for this false narrative that Pallywood was born to fill the supply. The obscene practice of using human shields to supply fresh victims for photographers was generated.
Hamas leaders have even boasted that their citizens wish to be "martyrs for Islam." I'm sure many do not, but are forced into it. These people need to be liberated from Hamas, and Hamas needs to be liberated from existence.
Now, this scapegoating and demonizing of Israel (and by extension Jews as a whole) is tied into radical arms of the Left and Right-wing politics in the West. Jews, a resented intelligent minority, have always been scapegoats throughout history, which led to the Shoah. This has not ended, unfortunately. The Palestinian cause was created to provide a socially acceptable way of continuing this irrational collective Jew-hatred.
No one who advocates for Palestinians cares for them; many of them don't even care for themselves and dedicate their lives and sacrifice their children to Islamic jihad. Their entire identity was constructed in the 1960s by Communist historians for the sole purpose of giving license to Jew-hatred, which is the real underlying cause of a century of Islamic wars and terrorism and corresponding defensive actions on the part of Israelis.
Before the 1960s, the so-called Palestinians were a rabble of Arabs motivated to wage war by Islamic jihad, influenced in part by Nazi ideology, and supported by the Arab world. Then the KGB took up their cause, as part of the Cold War, which continues to this day through Communist China and its allies (e.g, South Africa).
I look forward to a time when they will be evicted to some area far out of rocket range, and this will be over. The movement of large numbers of people to avoid conflict is not new. About 800,000 Mizrahi Jews had to move out of Islamized areas to Israel. Never have people been more deserving of being moved to a faraway place than the Palestinians. They have truly earned it.
Incidentally, that faraway place should not be the West. Many have come to the West (eg., France, UK, Canada) and have brought their toxic worldview with them, which is unacceptable. Yet Western leaders keep letting them. Facilitating the mass immigration of Islamists is the suicide of the West. Not even the Arab countries want them, but we're supposed to take them?!
If there are parts of what I wrote above in need of elaboration, correction, or clarification, I welcome it.
In December 2003, Sharon made a 180-degree ideological shift. Earlier that year, Sharon won a landslide electoral victory by opposing Labor Party leader Amram Mitzna’s plan to unilaterally withdraw from the Gaza Strip. Sharon famously said, “The fate of Tel Aviv is the fate of Netzarim,” which at the time was a frontline Israeli community in Gaza.
In December 2003, Sharon stunned the country by announcing he intended to implement Mitzna’s strategically reckless platform. And in 2004 he held a referendum among Likud members, seeking their support for his about-face. Likud members rejected his plan overwhelmingly, but rather than stick his plan in a drawer and forget about it, Sharon threw his voters under the bus and ran over them.
The Sharon disengagement plan was designed to improve Israel's security. Its stated logic was that in the absence of political negotiations to end the Israeli-Palestinian conflict only a unilateral initiative would change the rules of the game. However, there is reason to suspect that other incentives led Sharon. Reporters claimed that the whole plan was hatched to avoid Sharon's indictment by State Prosecutor Edna Arbel in various scandals where he was involved. See Raviv Drucker and Ofer Shelah, Boomerang: The Failure of Leadership in the Second Intifada (Jerusalem, Israel: Keter, 2008 [Hebrew]). Other commentators refrain from accusing Sharon with criminal motivation, but refer to his possible domestic political intrigues as the incentive for the plan. See, for that matter, Aluf Ben, "The Ambiguous Way Forward: The Puzzle of Sharon's Intentions," The National Interest, (2005): 144-148. Additional evidence for latent incentives for the plan can be found in an interview with Dov Weisglass, Prime Minister Sharon's Chief of Staff, who claimed: "The significance of the disengagement plan is the freezing of the peace process. [...] When you freeze that process, you prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state and you prevent a discussion on the refugees, the borders and Jerusalem. Disengagement supplies the amount of formaldehyde that is necessary so there will not be a political process with the Palestinians.
"We reached that conclusion after years of thinking otherwise. After years of attempts at dialogue. But when Arafat undermined Abu Mazen at the end of the summer of 2003, we reached the sad conclusion that there is no one to talk to, no one to negotiate with. Hence the disengagement plan. Because when you're playing solitaire, when there is no one sitting across from you at the table, you have no choice but to deal the cards yourself."
Information transferred to the Bush Administration:
"The first was the `Karine A' weapons ship. The second was a certain piece of intelligence that I sent them that shows clearly Arafat's full awareness of financial aspects of the perpetration of terrorist acts. When those things became clear about a person who swore 16,000 times to the Americans that he would make every effort to fight terrorism, he was erased. From that moment he was as good as dead."
Just read what were the foolish assumptions made for the disengagement.
Personally I don't believe s word of it:
"The American term is to park conveniently. The disengagement plan makes it possible for Israel to park conveniently in an interim situation that distances us as far as possible from political pressure. It legitimizes our contention that there is no negotiating with the Palestinians. There is a decision here to do the minimum possible in order to maintain our political situation. The decision is proving itself. It is making it possible for the Americans to go to the seething and simmering international community and say to them, `What do you want.' It also transfers the initiative to our hands. It compels the world to deal with our idea, with the scenario we wrote. It places the Palestinians under tremendous pressure. It forces them into a corner that they hate to be in. It thrusts them into a situation in which they have to prove their seriousness. There are no more excuses. There are no more Israeli soldiers spoiling their day. And for the first time they have a slice of land with total continuity on which they can race from one end to the other in their Ferrari. And the whole world is watching them - them, not us. The whole world is asking what they intend to do with this slice of land."
See Ari Shavit, "The Big Freeze – Interview with Dov Weisglass," Ha'aretz, October 18, 2004.
"right to defend itself against terrorism, including to take actions against terrorist organizations. The United States will lead efforts, working together with Jordan, Egypt, and others in the international community, to build the capacity and will of Palestinian institutions to fight terrorism, dismantle terrorist organizations, and prevent the areas from which Israel has withdrawn from posing a threat that would have to be addressed by any other means."
It never ceases to amaze me how the Red-Green coalition twists, omits, or invents history to serve the grievance script of the hour. Gaza was not simply “sealed” by Israeli cruelty after disengagement. The record shows an attempted framework for opening Gaza to trade, travel, and development, brokered with American involvement and tied to basic security conditions. That part gets memory-holed because it wrecks the propaganda. Hamas did not build a Singapore on the Mediterranean. It built terror rule, civil war, rockets, tunnels, kidnappings, and finally October 7. Israel did not owe Gaza a seaport for importing war. Egypt had security concerns too. Facts matter. Timelines matter. Agreements matter. If the maniacs want to talk about Gaza’s isolation, they must also talk about the political and terrorist choices that murdered the alternative.
People don't wanna know the bitter truth:
fifteenth floor vs twelfth floor means that the Hamas Gang won the election by a whopping 20%
"Hamas militants seized several Fatah members and threw one of them, Mohammed Sweirki, an officer in the Presidential Guard, off the top of the tallest building in Gaza, a 15-story apartment building. In retaliation, Fatah militants attacked and killed the Imam of the city's Great Mosque, Mohammed al-Rifati. They also opened fire on the home of Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh. Just before midnight, a Hamas militant was thrown off a 12-story building."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Gaza_(2007)
Much easier to just blame and hate the Jews. Remember what the Arabs always say when among themselves Khybar khybar ya yahud the army of Mohamed will come for you. Yeah really.
The Fatah party came to power in 2005, the same year Israel completely withdrew from Gaza and handed control to the Fatah party. Subsequently, Hamas fought Fatah in a violent coup and took control of Gaza in 2007.
Additional information for you:
בג"ץ סירב להכשיל את ההתנתקות: הרכב של 11 שופטי בג"ץ הודיע הבוקר (ה') כי הוא דוחה את 12 העתירות השונות שהוגשו נגד חוק פינוי-פיצוי. ההחלטה התקבלה ברוב של 10 שופטים, נגד דעתו החולקת של השופט אדמונד לוי. 9.6.05
https://www.ynet.co.il/articles/0,7340,L-3096958,00.html
https://israelbehindthenews.com/2023/02/22/education-system-commemorates-gush-katif-a-dark-chapter-in-israeli-history/?utm_source
עלות הגרוש מעזה
https://www.zman.co.il/332808/popup/
https://www.algemeiner.com/2019/08/18/how-the-disengagement-harmed-israels-security/
https://www.haaretz.com/2004-10-07/ty-article/the-big-freeze/0000017f-e597-d62c-a1ff-fdffe50c0000
Israel already knows what happens when it withdraws from territories.
It may have worked out mostly well with the Sinai Peninsula, but the two other times out of three, Islamist terrorists took over.
First, when the IDF left southern Lebanon in 2000, and then after the Disengagement from the Gaza Strip in 2005.
In both of those cases, a local population had been trained to keep the extremists at bay – first, the South Lebanon Army, which worked with the IDF, then, Fatah-affiliated Palestinian Authority security forces, trained by the US – and they were quickly overrun and massacred by Hezbollah and Hamas, respectively.
"We have seen from recent history that opening the door to territorial compromise to the Palestinians has not resulted in peace, but rather in war. In 2005, Israel made the painful but bold decision to evacuate all its citizens from Gaza. Optimists envisioned the possibility of a “Singapore on the Mediterranean,” with a flourishing economy and peaceful relations rooted in commerce. Israel even agreed to leave intact its world-class greenhouses and farms that blossomed throughout the Strip.
Tragically, Palestinians destroyed those agriculture facilities within 24 hours of Israel’s “Disengagement” from Gaza, where Hamas terrorists quickly took over the governing functions. Israel has been forced to fight three wars over the past 16 years to stop the missile attacks and cross-border infiltrations targeting our schools, hospitals and communities."
https://m.jpost.com/opinion/jerusalem-consulate-is-a-de-facto-embassy-for-palestinians-opinion-684045
Israel withdrew entirely from Gaza, pulling out 8,500 settlers, and handing over to the "Palestinians" the greenhouses in which those settlers had grown flowers and fruit for export to Europe, in the hope that the new owners would take over the turnkey operation and thrive.
Instead, the Palestinians chose to vandalize and destroy the greenhouses.
Mahmoud Abbas was elected President of the Palestinian Authority. He is now entering the seventeenth year of his four-year term.
https://besacenter.org/perspectives-papers/gaza-disengagement-lessons/
https://www.jns.org/15-years-after-disengagement-from-gaza-area-mired-by-violence/
https://www.jihadwatch.org/2023/08/american-officials-admit-giving-mistaken-advice-to-israel
https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/palestinian-rocket-and-mortar-attacks-against-israel since 2000
https://www.jns.org/opinion/gaza-fighting-changes-nothing-about-israels-image-struggle/?utm_source
Israel is now paying the price for its 2005 Gaza Cowardly Retreat
"What is happening at this current moment in time along our southern border, and what has occurred there in previous rounds of violence, is not something that has taken place within a vacuum. The mortar bombs, the rockets and the missiles neither were, nor are, a matter of divine will. They are all the result of our own stupidity – the folly of the "Disengagement Plan".
https://www.israelhayom.com/opinions/israel-is-now-paying-the-price-for-its-2005-gaza-pullout/
I view the so-called Palestinians of Gaza as temporary and belligerent occupants of an Israeli territory, badly in need of eviction for the sake of peace. It's the only way since they have proved (many times over) that they have no intention of ending terrorism or keeping peace agreements.
Gaza is properly part of Israel. The names of the villages are Jewish and go back thousands of years. The people typically called Arabs moved into the region in waves over centuries, and the region was Islamized. The movement of Jewish settlers out of Gaza was a mistake.
The idea that Palestinians should be allowed to stay there and rebuild, after decades of supporting terrorism and with no intention of stopping their war, is ridiculous. They should be expelled from Gaza and from the so-called West Bank (Judea and Samaria), too. Arab states should take them. Some African nations said they would consider it.
The UN's opinion is irrelevant, since it is just being influenced by corrupt member states for partisan reasons. UNRWA's connection to Hamas and its frequent criticism of Israel while ignoring real human rights violations by its member states should have been the scandal that ended the United Nations.
Also, while I'm at it, the Third Temple should be built. The fact that it has not been is simply to quell Islamic fundamentalism. The whole thing has gone on for far too long, only because Muslim religious identity is unfortunately tied to the ideology of anti-Zionism, reflecting a deep insecurity on the part of Muslims who adopt that ideology.
Why do you have to destroy practitioners of the parent faith in order to affirm the truth of your faith? This extreme supersessionism stems from an irrational fear of Jews having political power. Anti-Zionism seems to be the veneer for a deeper collective pathology that has gripped the Muslim world and many parts of the West.
The genocidal ambition to annihilate Israel has been made sacred by Muslim religious leaders. By claiming the Palestinians are helpless victims, it gives license to destroy the supposed oppressor. There is such a demand for this false narrative that Pallywood was born to fill the supply. The obscene practice of using human shields to supply fresh victims for photographers was generated.
Hamas leaders have even boasted that their citizens wish to be "martyrs for Islam." I'm sure many do not, but are forced into it. These people need to be liberated from Hamas, and Hamas needs to be liberated from existence.
Now, this scapegoating and demonizing of Israel (and by extension Jews as a whole) is tied into radical arms of the Left and Right-wing politics in the West. Jews, a resented intelligent minority, have always been scapegoats throughout history, which led to the Shoah. This has not ended, unfortunately. The Palestinian cause was created to provide a socially acceptable way of continuing this irrational collective Jew-hatred.
No one who advocates for Palestinians cares for them; many of them don't even care for themselves and dedicate their lives and sacrifice their children to Islamic jihad. Their entire identity was constructed in the 1960s by Communist historians for the sole purpose of giving license to Jew-hatred, which is the real underlying cause of a century of Islamic wars and terrorism and corresponding defensive actions on the part of Israelis.
Before the 1960s, the so-called Palestinians were a rabble of Arabs motivated to wage war by Islamic jihad, influenced in part by Nazi ideology, and supported by the Arab world. Then the KGB took up their cause, as part of the Cold War, which continues to this day through Communist China and its allies (e.g, South Africa).
I look forward to a time when they will be evicted to some area far out of rocket range, and this will be over. The movement of large numbers of people to avoid conflict is not new. About 800,000 Mizrahi Jews had to move out of Islamized areas to Israel. Never have people been more deserving of being moved to a faraway place than the Palestinians. They have truly earned it.
Incidentally, that faraway place should not be the West. Many have come to the West (eg., France, UK, Canada) and have brought their toxic worldview with them, which is unacceptable. Yet Western leaders keep letting them. Facilitating the mass immigration of Islamists is the suicide of the West. Not even the Arab countries want them, but we're supposed to take them?!
If there are parts of what I wrote above in need of elaboration, correction, or clarification, I welcome it.
The surrounding Rat countries -
Their own kind can provide them with all their needs. When that suggestion is on the table 2”what can anyone say???
The Gaza disengagement disaster September 2005:
In December 2003, Sharon made a 180-degree ideological shift. Earlier that year, Sharon won a landslide electoral victory by opposing Labor Party leader Amram Mitzna’s plan to unilaterally withdraw from the Gaza Strip. Sharon famously said, “The fate of Tel Aviv is the fate of Netzarim,” which at the time was a frontline Israeli community in Gaza.
In December 2003, Sharon stunned the country by announcing he intended to implement Mitzna’s strategically reckless platform. And in 2004 he held a referendum among Likud members, seeking their support for his about-face. Likud members rejected his plan overwhelmingly, but rather than stick his plan in a drawer and forget about it, Sharon threw his voters under the bus and ran over them.
The Sharon disengagement plan was designed to improve Israel's security. Its stated logic was that in the absence of political negotiations to end the Israeli-Palestinian conflict only a unilateral initiative would change the rules of the game. However, there is reason to suspect that other incentives led Sharon. Reporters claimed that the whole plan was hatched to avoid Sharon's indictment by State Prosecutor Edna Arbel in various scandals where he was involved. See Raviv Drucker and Ofer Shelah, Boomerang: The Failure of Leadership in the Second Intifada (Jerusalem, Israel: Keter, 2008 [Hebrew]). Other commentators refrain from accusing Sharon with criminal motivation, but refer to his possible domestic political intrigues as the incentive for the plan. See, for that matter, Aluf Ben, "The Ambiguous Way Forward: The Puzzle of Sharon's Intentions," The National Interest, (2005): 144-148. Additional evidence for latent incentives for the plan can be found in an interview with Dov Weisglass, Prime Minister Sharon's Chief of Staff, who claimed: "The significance of the disengagement plan is the freezing of the peace process. [...] When you freeze that process, you prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state and you prevent a discussion on the refugees, the borders and Jerusalem. Disengagement supplies the amount of formaldehyde that is necessary so there will not be a political process with the Palestinians.
"We reached that conclusion after years of thinking otherwise. After years of attempts at dialogue. But when Arafat undermined Abu Mazen at the end of the summer of 2003, we reached the sad conclusion that there is no one to talk to, no one to negotiate with. Hence the disengagement plan. Because when you're playing solitaire, when there is no one sitting across from you at the table, you have no choice but to deal the cards yourself."
Information transferred to the Bush Administration:
"The first was the `Karine A' weapons ship. The second was a certain piece of intelligence that I sent them that shows clearly Arafat's full awareness of financial aspects of the perpetration of terrorist acts. When those things became clear about a person who swore 16,000 times to the Americans that he would make every effort to fight terrorism, he was erased. From that moment he was as good as dead."
Just read what were the foolish assumptions made for the disengagement.
Personally I don't believe s word of it:
"The American term is to park conveniently. The disengagement plan makes it possible for Israel to park conveniently in an interim situation that distances us as far as possible from political pressure. It legitimizes our contention that there is no negotiating with the Palestinians. There is a decision here to do the minimum possible in order to maintain our political situation. The decision is proving itself. It is making it possible for the Americans to go to the seething and simmering international community and say to them, `What do you want.' It also transfers the initiative to our hands. It compels the world to deal with our idea, with the scenario we wrote. It places the Palestinians under tremendous pressure. It forces them into a corner that they hate to be in. It thrusts them into a situation in which they have to prove their seriousness. There are no more excuses. There are no more Israeli soldiers spoiling their day. And for the first time they have a slice of land with total continuity on which they can race from one end to the other in their Ferrari. And the whole world is watching them - them, not us. The whole world is asking what they intend to do with this slice of land."
See Ari Shavit, "The Big Freeze – Interview with Dov Weisglass," Ha'aretz, October 18, 2004.
"right to defend itself against terrorism, including to take actions against terrorist organizations. The United States will lead efforts, working together with Jordan, Egypt, and others in the international community, to build the capacity and will of Palestinian institutions to fight terrorism, dismantle terrorist organizations, and prevent the areas from which Israel has withdrawn from posing a threat that would have to be addressed by any other means."
https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/president-bush-letter-on-peace-principles-to-israeli-pm-sharon-april-2004
The Nazi/Hamas/ISIS terror tunnels
https://m.jpost.com/israel-news/article-770123